A simple search of Amazon.com will give everyone a taste of John McCain's religious philosophy. To say he has not addressed his faith to the public is really intellectually lazy. He wrote a book about his faith. Check out "Faith of My Fathers: a Family Memoir", "Hard Call: The Art of Great Decisions" and "Why Courage Matters: the Way to a Braver Life". No other candidate has given us more insight into his religion and decision-making / reasoning than McCain. Biblegirl needs to read a book or two before espousing this crap.

http://tinyurl.com/5cak4d

Why does whether or not he was baptized within a certain church matter? I do not remember a part of the Constitution that says the people have a right to know the private and deeply held religious beliefs of our elected officials. If Obama's children were baptized at a black separatist church by a racist anti-American pastor, would we hold it against Obama? Oh yeah, some of us are...

Maybe the real issue should be whether there should be a litmus test for voters rather than candidates. Idiots who base there vote on a single issue like abortion or gay marriage, should have 'LOSER' stamped on their voter ID cards. Single issue voters piss me off!

Or, perhaps, he feels its distasteful to use something like faith as a bargaining chip for campaigning.

I'm not saying that Obama and Clinton are. However, I find this post judgmental and well, completely in opposition to Jesus teachings, which is generally par for the course.

So perhaps he's not reached that ultimate conclusion. Perhaps, given his life experiences, he's got a lot more to hash out with God before he commits to a religion. I don't think you can knock a guy for keeping his faith close to the vest. Would you rather he fake it?

Spot on El Rey. The give-away on the intellectual dishonesty is that evangelicals are referred initially in the third-person and then surreptitiously in the first-person. Biblegirl bounces back and forth speaking for all evangelicals and just herself. This was simply an awful article.

So a Christian's faith is either all-encompassing, involves a dramatic conversion experience, and is publicly displayed, or it's "lukewarm" and you're a superior Christian? Basically you're saying that if you're not an evangelical, you're not a "real" Christian?

So let's say McCain doesn't pass your litmus test -- then what? He needs to go have a remedial conversion experience? You're not going to vote? What's your point?

More power to John McCain for treating his religion as a personal matter and not a tool to bludgeon others with. If he becomes president I hope he spends his time improving the economy and trying to end the war (ok I won't hold my breath on that one), I don't want to see him proselytizing to a whole nation and trying to have science books removed from schools, elect Joel Olsteen if that is what you are looking for.

And what the hell does this have to do with Dallas? Is Unfair Park going to be become Julie's Pulpit?

As a pastor, I have been more than curious as to his SBC involvement without commitment.

If he's an Episcopalian, that's cool. But has he had a shift of doctrinal understanding or are there are other reasons he goes to the church he does? I assume there's an Episcopal church in his area, but I'm too intellectually lazy at the moment to check.

;-)

Some disambiguation: Person of faith does not necessarily equal Christian person. Further, Christian person does not necessarily equal evangelical. Maybe the reason McCain doesn't wear Jesus' loincloth on his sleeve like the current Evangelical Decider is the same reason that Jefferson and Hamilton didn't shoehorn a lot of dogmatic claptrap into the foundation of our country's government. That reason is that it's a terrible idea to pander to intolerance in order to be more popular. Thanks, Karl.

Separation of church and state, anyone? Maybe the reason he is not talking about it, is because it is not relevant. The man plans on making decisions based on what is best for the country, not his own personal agenda and beliefs. That I can respect.

Why is it a pre-requisite for our President to be a far-right-wing evangelical? Can't religious faith be a private, personal matter?

1. As others have said, he has made his faith and decision making process abundantly clear.
2. The facts listed above are part of why I voted for him in the Texas primary. I have had my fill of evangelicals ruining the Republican party.

Hmmmm...
Ever since I dissed her record collection, Bible Girl won't publish my comments.

I commented much the same way you all did, but it didn't get published. Of course, this one might not, either.

Pat Robertson endorsed Guliani because Hillary scared him, it certainly had nothing to do with Rudy's faith. Let them come to McCain or accept the alternative.

So because Barack Obama has "described a conversion experience," one should conclude that he is a superior candidate?

With due respect, regardless of one's policy preferences, that's just dumb.

Personally, I was raised in a household that, though religious, didn't promote discussions of religion with non-family. Frankly, such discussions are just rude, because inevitably they result in the kind of judging that Julie engages in when she alleges that McCain's faith is "lukewarm," "distant," or possibly even non-existent. Those kind of allegations can turn polite company into impolite company in a hurry, and so should not be raised in such company.

The fact that McCain shares this outlook--regardless of what his underlying faith may or may not be--makes me more likely to vote for him than I was before reading this post. I for one am sick of the implicit "my faith is better than yours" that comes from certain cirles in the Republican Party. It's rude. It's impolitic. And as we have seen over the past seven years, it produces bad presidents.

Julie, I love ya, kiddo, but the vast majority of Americans are *not* evangelical, and do not believe in, or feel comfortable with, wearing their religion on their sleeves. I might suggest a word or two of Jesus' words on the matter, but I'd hope you'd know those verses already.

If evangelical Americans can't bring themselves to vote for someone with a more quiet style of faith, or indeed of another faith altogether, it's just one more reason why they richly deserve to find themselves politically powerless for a few years. It'll do them and us a world of good.

Religion. Ruins. Everything.

Religious minutiae, family recipes, whether folks in the country go hunting when they get mad, pants suits, laugh styles, bowling, cocktails -- This is the most trivial political campaign I've ever seen, and I've seen a bunch. This is creepy. Is there anybody here that can give us a clear idea what the candidates might do about Iran's nuclear program? Or their solution to the housing crisis? I thought not. Somebody warned a long time ago that this is what would happen if people stopped reading newspapers and turned to blogs for information. And sure enough they were right. What's next, Hillary's dental practices? Obama's laundry list? Whether McCain kneels, sits or stands in church?

Let's take a look at the religious leaders supporting McCain. Let's start with a guy named Hagee.............

I actually thought John McCain was a Senior Elder of a Wiccan Community in Arizona.

Julie, what are you going to do girl? There are no tongue speaking, snake loving Pentecostal running.
You can't vote for Obama cause he cool with the gays.
You can't vote for Hillary cause she is pro-choice.

Is it too far fetched for you to make a decision based on what is best for our country? The war? The economy? Price of gas? Poverty? Global Warming?

Ever thought of voting for something instead of against everything?

Bethany, before I saw your second post I was wondering if I was imagining it, but I think the same thing happened with me -- my comment didn't show up for a long time, other comments appeared during that time, then finally mine popped up, inserted into the thread in approximately the time order when I posted it. It's not a big deal, but it's odd. Then again, I've gotten occasional server errors when trying to post here recently, so who knows what's going on. Unfair Park may run on a Windows 95 machine in Wilonsky's bathroom for all I know.

Actually, ROB, we've been having all brand of server issues, which prompted the comments hang-up. (My apologies, Bethany, as well.) I'd also like to take the time, while here, to announce my brand-new column Bar Mitzvah Boy, during which I will merely pass along favorite Jewish recipes appropriate to forthcoming holidays.

As Passover fast approaches, and the Angel of Death circles the block with Elijah the Prophet, Abraham Lincoln, Mr. Spock and Cheech and Chong, may I suggest this traditional apple-walnut charoset recipe, which I've found to be a helpful stand-by for any Hungry Hebrew who's tried to trick up the Sedar without much luck.

http://tinyurl.com/5qqx43

And as much as I loathe gefilte fish, I'm even thinking of making some this year. Doubtful, but who knows.

http://tinyurl.com/5ccy4u

See ya next time on the Kosher Korner. Now, back to more Who's Your God?

Julie, although you made a very few cogent points, you're no longer an opinion-influencer for me, speaking as someone who has consistently gathered opinions from across the spectrum.

So we're choosing a president based on who's imaginary best friend forever who lives in the clouds is better than another's?

Heck of a system we have...

Every blog I have read from this writer has been full of bias and has lacked intellectual skepticism. Please, don't let her post anything else. She's the Schutze of the right wing.

At least Schutze has the courtesy to respond to readers' comments.

As long as we're going for balance here, I'd like to see a Wicken Women column, too.

I've been baptized, had the spiritual conversion experience and kept searching. I found Tao te Ching offers great lessons on leadership, modesty, and really a more expansive version of the beatitudes. I found Buddhism enriched the same way teaching me to help my heart unclinch. In studying Hinduism they have some really convoluted stories that are similar to the Judeao-Christian stories but with wrinkles that made you understand that we are nearly incapable of thinking Objectively--without the brackets of time, space and causality that is inexorably built into the very fabric of our language.

The shortest sentance in the Bible is "I am." And this is not true, the sentance is "AM." This is incomprehensible for us, for the essential verb "to be" presumes a subject and most likely and object. But if you are God, and you are everywhere, and there is nothing but you, and you are eternal...You can't be an object anymore than a sketch, drawing or painting is an object for us. You can't run with a photo, talk with a photo,... God is beyond, greater than that, bigger. In fact, serious theologians all will agree that "God doesn't exist," because this would make God part of creation, the Creator doesn't create himself this is may see funny but it is Muslim halal, Jewish Kosher, Christian Orthodoxy.

OK, I point that out because that gives us an idea of Tawheed or the Unity, or Oneness of God. So enter the Jesus. Jesus is the Messiah to Christians and Muslims. Jews believe the Messiah will come but hasn't yet. Christians point to Jewish prophecy to help identify Jesus as the Messiah.

But Christians never ask who was the Messiah? The Jews were NEVER intended and NEVER would WORSHIP the MESSIAH. The Messiah was not God, but a special agent of God. According to the Jews the Messiah would come to deliver the faithful to the true path of God. In this way the messiah would be our Saviour.

Orthodox Christianity insists that God is Both the ONE Creator above and the created Messiah. However, there has always been a range of views from Jesus being the human Messiah, a singular, Special Agent for God, with a special message but finally human; to Jesus an everpresent Aspect of One God that becomes manifest from time to time. (Islam incidentally believes in former concept.) Anyways, Bible Girl, Christians believe somewhere in this range about God.

It seems to me most haven't really thought about it all that much. I wish they would, because the "Trinity" while a nice river is extra-biblical, illogical, and heretical. Jesus never asks us to worship him, so I don't understand why more haven't questioned the Trinity. This doesn't mean that Jesus' lessons aren't any less poignant or any less true. Maybe John McCain, like Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln and others like myself have real problems with the trinity. Maybe he realizes he doesn't understand it.

By the way I have an evangelical opportunity for you. The Quran itself tells its readers to ask anyone to explain the Trinity to you, if you can understand how three equals one? or how a divided God could rule without divisions? to turn them. Soren Kierkegaard argued as a Christian that the Trinity is so logically absurd that it makes us limitlessly free.

Anyway, the Tao te Ching says that "the Tao that can be named is not the Eternal Tao." Maybe John McCain, thankfully is smart enough not to get into religious discussions since these answers can't be known and most people don't even really know much about it.

You must be the most miserable, uptight, frigid woman in Dallas.

Robert, here's one of my favorites: Apple-noodle kugel.

http://www.bhg.com/recipes/recipedetail.jsp?recipeId=39262

Disclaimer: I was raised Episcopalian, not Jewish. But the only food associated with our ceremonies is some pretty tasteless unleavened bread, and of course, the Shrove Tuesday Pancake Supper.

Wow! There's a lot of hate out there Bible Girl, but nothing you didn't know already. Jesus said they would hate you because they hate Him, and, obviously they do.

Don't let the intellectually and spiritually dead comments get to you - there just proof that you're showing the Light, and the darkness hates the Light!

And, for the record, Scott, the Trinity is not extra biblical, illogical, or heretical. The term "Trinity" is not mentioned in the bible, but the concept and the truth is all over it. Jesus told the Jews, "before Abraham was, I AM." He claimed to be God, and the Jews sought to stone Him for it. God is one God, in 3 persons. He exist eternally, and is fully satisfied in Himself (and thus, does not need fellowship). There is no division in the Trinity, because God is not sinful, He is perfect. And in that perfection, He is perfectly submissive to Himself. Jesus is submissive to the Father, the Father loves Jesus. Both seek each other's glory. I could go on, but you'll never really believe in less you want to, and you'll never want to unless the Holy Spirit (God) changes your heart. And if He does, there's plenty of solid evidence of the existence and prefect logic of the Trinity out there for you.

While Emmersion is important for baptist, that is not what it says in the Bible. Some scriptures suggest one may be standing upright while being sprinkled with water...
Baptism in all respects is just a public profession of one's faith in Christ. We are saved by grace, and so then the most important baptism is that of the Holy Spirit.
If you do not have Him then your emmersion or sprinkling of water means nothing. Unfortunately some baptist perfer the legalistic route and have aperson dunked, but again we are save by what Christ did on the cross , not by what we do in a tank of water. If one confesses with his mouth and then believes in his heart that God sent Jesus to die for his sin, then that person is saved, regardless if he is ever publicly baptized or not... We live under the law of grace...

Evangelicals can be obnoxious. Why? 'Cause very few of 'em have the stones to evangelize nonbelievers. Instead, they make a nuisance of themselves to other Protestants. From the Evangelical viewpoint, apparently if you're not their brand of Christian, you're not Christian. Don't be surprised when you get short shrift with me. I've lost my patience with the type of Christian who makes a public show of faith and goes off in secret to practice depravity. If we must judge McCain, and it seems we must, then we should be examining the fruit of his labors, not whether he blathers about his inner spirtitual life.

The Christian Right rarely mentions the only serious Christian Candidate left of the field. Yep - Ron Paul! Not only that, Ron Paul has a workable strategy to roll back the effect of Roe v Wade state by state.

Roe v Wade will never occur on a Federal level, so it's the perfect "issue" for the Religious Right's movers and shakers. It's used to whip the religious right's faithful up into a froth whenever expedient. It's not a fight these cynical leaders want to win, it's a fight they want to use.

There's more to being Christian than standing for nothing and falling for everything. There are effective ways we can act on our faith in the world, without becoming worldly. Walking in lock step behind slick talking preachers may protect Christians from worldliness, but it makes us ineffectual servants of Christ as well.